Bgood Family Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461884871
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6174245252
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,430
Expenses
$65,851
Assets
$8,986
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON OLINTO (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JON OLINTO (PRESIDENT)
  • ADAM GORLOVSKY-SCHEPP (TREASURER)
  • BAKHTIAR MIKHAK (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Founded on the principle that everyday people inherently want to "be good", the b.good family foundation's mission is to use micro-grants to enable individuals to make positive change in our community.

What it reported doing in 2017

B.we believe in the power of a passionate individual with a burning desire to change things for the better, whether it's motivated social entrepreneurs, existing charitable leaders, or everyday people with a generous spirit. We have witnessed first-hand the incredible, contagious impact of a person who has found the support they need to make their idea a reality. By giving directly to those inspired individuals groups, we aim to spark positive change in our community. B.good inc. Pays all expenses of the foundation except for grants directly and is not reimbursed. This includes the executive directors salary of $15,600.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -207.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 39.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -28.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2015 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.